> 1. What techniques do you currently use or plan to use to access and
> process WWW content for alternative or enhanced rendering for
> people with
> disabilities?
The DOM exposed by Internet Explorer and the Java Access Bridge From Sun.
>
> 2. Are you familiar with the W3C Document Object Module (DOM)[1]?
Yes
>
> 3. If yes to question 2, are you familiar with APIs you can
> use to access
> the DOM implementations of current user agents (i.e. Microsoft
> implementation of the DOM in IE 4.0/5.0)?
Yes.
>
> 4. If yes to question 2 and 3, do you think the DOM will meet
> your needs
> for access to WWW content?
Yes, but more user agents need to provide one.
>
> 5. If yes to question 3 and 4, how complex and resource
> intensive is it to
> use the DOM to access WWW content?
It took about 500 hours of development time to get our current
implementation working properly. Much of this time was spent making
internal design changes to allow JFW to work with text from a DOM, not
just from the screen. Accessing the DOM was reasonably simple.
>
> 6. Indicate which of the following resources would help you
> in using or
> deciding to use the DOM for accessing WWW content. Respond to each
> question with a yes, no or don’t know.
>
At this point, we really don't need the help because the work has been
done. I'll respond from the standpoint of someone new getting into
the process.
> 6.a. Demonstration code?
Yes
>
> 6.b. WWW based tutorial materials on DOM capabilities and
> programming examples?
Yes
>
> 6.c Face-to-face workshop on DOM capabilities and programming
> examples?
No
>
> 6.d Access to people with expertise in DOM capabilities and
> programming?
Yes, if these people are closely tied to the internals of the products
implementing the DOM.
>
> 6.e Open ended question for you to indicate any other
> resources that would
> help you?
>
> 7. Could you please review and comment on current version of
> the W3C Web
> Accessibility Initiative User Agent guidelines [2], especially the
> checkpoints related to Guideline 5: Observe system
> conventions and standard
> interfaces [3]?
>
Looks fine except for the point about user agents and assistive
technologies communicating in a timely fashion, which appears to be a
Priority 2. I think it should be Priority 1.